Separator

In Defense of Linear Storytelling

230340423
Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Final Fantasy 13

You probably wouldn't watch a movie where each scene was shown in a random order (films like Memento notwithstanding). You wouldn't read a book if the chapters didn't make sense in context with each other. And unless you're listening for satanic messages, you wouldn't play a music track in any way but forward.

So why do we demand anything different from games?

In a postmortem published in the October issue of Game Developer magazine, Final Fantasy 13 team members Motomu Toriyama and Akihiko Maeda wrote that they had worried about how Western gamers would receive Final Fantasy 13 due to its extreme linearity.  

It's a common complaint from those who profess to dislike Japanese RPGs. "You can only go where you're supposed to go," they say. "You're forced to advance the story, a story over which you have no control."

My response is simple: So what?

 

With some obvious exceptions (puzzlers like Tetris, sandboxes like Minecraft), every game has a story to tell. The style of narrative breaks down into two main forms: the kind where you create your own avatar, or the kind where you step into a predetermined role. Most Western RPGs, especially for PC, fit the first category. The majority of other games, including JRPGs and most first-person shooters, fit the second.

I've written recently about the narrative pitfalls of the first style. Making your own character sounds like a great way to control more of the story, and on the surface this is true -- you choose your dialogue, reactions, and personality. Strengths and weaknesses, class and talents, and even physical appearance are all up to the player.

What effect does this really have on the story? Not much. Oh, you might get to decide which objectives to tackle first, or how much to level up. But to advance in the game -- to truly "grow" as a character -- you have to follow the main storyline or quest path. Otherwise, the game world is just standing still. The dire threat plaguing the kingdom sits twiddling its thumbs.

The trouble is, when designers have to account for each individual player's whims, it's impossible to craft a really cohesive story. Yes, a game might be "non-linear" enough for me to grind far past the necessary level, or complete any number of quests before moving on to the main plot. But this deliberately subverts the story's intended structure and pacing.

How can a writer anticipate the actions of every possible character and account for each player's choices? How can you make each objective and each growth option equally viable at any given time in any given character's progression, and still tell a story from start to finish? It simply doesn't work. It weakens the emotional impact of the narrative.

That leaves us with the second option: stepping into the shoes of a pre-written protagonist. This means that, while you may make choices as to how that character will play, he will always be imbued with the same personality, motivation, and lines of dialogue. No matter what materia you give Cloud or which characters you choose to fight alongside him, he's still going to be a spiky-headed loner with a checkered past.

The second style divorces gameplay choice and narrative choice -- players have freedom over the former but the latter remain set.

In both styles, no matter how the player chooses to proceed strategically, the outcome is the same -- the story cannot progress until the "linear" path is taken. But taking that path doesn't have to be a bad thing. Ceding that illusion of freedom and control allows for a more focused, complex story.

In a perfect world, of course, we wouldn't have to choose one or the other. I'd love to subvert the preset role of my character (as in, say, Final Fantasy 10's Sphere Grid, where you can develop party members contrary to their intended classes) and have the game's narrative take that into account. If my character was intended to be a fighter, and I decide to play him as a healer, that changes his motivation and personality. It would be fantastic for a game to anticipate that change and craft the story around my mechanical decisions, much as a good Dungeon Master might tailor a Dungeons & Dragons adventure around the party's behavior and background.

Unfortunately it just isn't possible, not with a mass-market title. Something like Sleep Is Death can make that sort of collaborative, flexible, dynamic storytelling work, because of its other design limitations and the personal nature of each game. In a mainstream RPG? Can't be done.

So I choose to give up my control. I choose to play the game as it was intended -- even if that means going straight from Point A to Point B. I choose a linear story.

 
Problem? Report this post
LAYTON SHUMWAY'S SPONSOR
Comments (10)
Bitmob
October 20, 2010

Linear storytelling, "So what?" indeed.  There are some games that I will primarily play just for the narrative, such as Final Fantasy 10.  As long as the narrative is compelling, who cares if all you're doing is literally walking your character straight?  You don't need to have complete control over every single stat, that's what sports games are for.  I'm perfectly fine with controlling my character to the next cutscene.

You make an interesting point about the "game world standing still."  The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion is a perfect example of this.  Even though a town is under attack and needs seemingly urgent assistance, you can delay in helping the townspeople by exploring the world, taking on other side missions, etc.  There are no consequences for delaying the mission, the town is frozen in time until you get there.

Mass Effect 2 attempts to resolve this issue.  Without giving too much away, near the end, if you choose to delay a certain mission to take on side missions, there are severe consequences on the main storyline.  This gives you a sense that the game world isn't standing still, and helps to add a touch of realism. 

Default_picture
October 20, 2010

I have the same issue with "nonlinear" games in that I find myself bored and unmotivated. By giving you TOO much to do at once and leaving you on your own without a clearly-defined objective in some cases (what I hated about Morrowind and Fallout 3), I don't feel any attachment to the story or a need to progress to see what happens next, as these games with disjointed stories honestly have no impact on the main story, because the side missions are just that: little interesting missions that will not have significance in the grand scheme of things 10 hours later.

Good article, and kudos to you for outlining why I feel, in many ways, JRPGs are still fundamentally superior to WRPGs in many ways.

Twitpic
October 20, 2010

Layton, great article! But I do strongly disagree with this statement: "So why do we demand anything different from games?"

Games are in a unique position to offer the ability to play a story from many different angles, and it really isn't that weird. Sure, like you said, it does detract from the impact of certain key moments, but it doesn't ruin the experience by any means.

I like both kinds of role-playing games, and as long as they're done well I don't mind if it's linear or not. But I don't think games should be compared to other forms of media when it comes to how to play a game.

Default_picture
October 20, 2010

It seems to me that one of the problems many people have with JRPGs is that they expect them to be, apropos, Role Playing Games. The problem with this is that the JRPG divorced itself from the more open, western fair in a single console generation (the original Dragon Quest being a largely open-world, non-linear affair where YOU were supposed to be the adventurer, where DQIV had a fairly set path for you to tread, fully characterized party members, and only the token silent protagonist as a nod to tabletop roots). But we gamers kept calling them RPGs because that was what they started as and that's just what we called them. 

As for me, I like narratively linear games. The reason for this, I find, is that if the game lets gives me narrative freedom, I quickly hit an uncanny valley. Many of Bioware's works are praised as being excellent roleplaying experiences, but I consistently found them terribly restricting - because with the dialog trees, I couldn't get my character to say exactly what I wanted him/her to. And that takes me out of the roleplaying experience entirely. In general, I either want total freedom, or none at all. And until non-linear RPGs get off of dialog trees, I'm not going to be able to get that experience from them. 

To be fair, JRPGs have exhibited consistently crappy writing. FFXIII started really, really good, but seemed to completely fall apart in the final third of the game, as though the writer had suddenly died and they just put his note cards in random order and that made the game's ending script. 

Overall, I tend to enjoy games where your freedom comes in how you develop your characters gameplay wise, rather than how your develop your characters narratively speaking. 

Robsavillo
October 21, 2010

I think games haven't properly explored the possibilities with non-linear storytelling. Your comparisons to film don't really fit here ([i]Momento[/i] is still linear narrative, just in reverse order), unless you want to talk about something like [i]Pulp Fiction[/i], but even then the story is merely split into two larger linear narratives. The medium of film is tied to linearity in ways that games are not, as Chris suggests.

The problem I have with this article is the assumption that storytelling requires writing. Games tell stories best through gameplay rather than dialogue. This is where games can really shine in the narrative side of things.

Take X-Com, for example. The narrative is a story [i]you[/i] create through gameplay: the tactical battles your squads fight, the alien technology you uncover, and the method through which you eliminate the external threat. Even Demon's Souls, which utilizes limited dialogue for atmosphereic purposes, has an underlying narrative driven purely by gameplay. (I've [url=http://www.bitmob.com/articles/demons-souls-telling-story-through-gameplay]written[/url] about this before.)

I'd like to see more games take their mechanics more seriously for the purposes of narrative. I think Thatgamecompany is the primary example of a developer who understands the relationship between gameplay and narrative, too.

230340423
October 21, 2010

@Rob: I suppose I was specifically speaking about games that already have writing, or are endeavoring to tell a more traditional story.

You're right -- frequently the best use of "narrative" in games is when there is no text at all, and the gameplay itself conveys the story. This is what can truly set games apart as their own unique medium. In that sense, as Chris commented above, we SHOULD expect something more and different from games.

Your examples are spot-on -- I recently replayed Flower with a friend and actually got an entirely different narrative experience from watching her play than from playing myself. I'd also include Shadow of the Colossus, which communicates so much to me from the actions of galloping across an empty land, seeing a giant beast I have to kill, and the effort it takes to kill it.

I guess my point was along the lines of, if part of a particular game's purpose is to tell me a detailed and specific story, I don't have a problem with just being told that story, rather than trying (and failing) to put my own stamp on it and then losing something from the experience when it doesn't work.

Chas_profile
October 21, 2010

I personally can't stand non-linear games/most Western RPGs and much prefer assuming the roles of preset characters, but I don't think that's the kind of linearity that ruined FFXIII. The actual game itself was linear. There was little to no deviation from the hallways and corridors throughout almost the entire game, and that made for a very contrictive atmosphere that choked the narrative to death for me.

 

I think RPGs need to find balance between open exploration and predetermined gameplay. Otherwise, we're either having the story forced down our throats or we're given so few restrictions we can't find anything meaningful to do.

Dcswirlonly_bigger
October 21, 2010

I think the complaint with FFXIII was that it felt extremely linear even compared to most JRPGs. JRPGs tell linear stories but they still let you explore an open-ended world. FFXIII much of the time was a corridor of enemies. FFX's world was also extremely linear, but it at least had towns and eventually the ability to travel back and forth on the path.

In gaming, linear and non-linear each have their advantages. A linear game should strive to be like a good rollercoaster ride, whereas a non-linear thing should be more like a toolbox or in some cases a choose-your-own-adventure book. It just depends on how well it's done.

I think the differences between Japanese and Western game design are most pronounced in each culture's interpretation of the RPG. There's a really old article on 1up.com that lays this out pretty nicely - if I can ever find it again.

Default_picture
October 21, 2010

Leave the non-linear games on the table top where they belong. I was an avid DnD player and no video game can ever really truly capture the real playing experience..

@John Madden

I totally agree with you about the pitfalls of non-linear RPGs. Morrowind, Fallout 3 and and any of the MMOs I have tried out there (WOW, Guildwars, DDO) didn't hold my interest at all. I'd readily sacrifice freedom (the ability to choose my actions in bite size little bland morsels) for scripted story entertainment. I want to feel like I'm part of an evolving, deep story with some drama and impact to the world.

Default_picture
October 21, 2010

I need a game to have a sense of purpose or momentum. Often nonlinear games with lots of sidequests feel odd because the main quest or plot is one built on "saving the world" yet the game lets you take your sweet time. Sure, it's fun to explore the world, but it can really kill the narration.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.